@algore refuses an honest debate on climate – again – because he knows he'll lose

One of the most annoying things about Al Gore’s climate proselytizing is the fact that that he has never, not once, allowed himself to publicly address the many criticisms levied against him. Being a politician, he has wrapped himself in a safety cocoon, coming out only when he has a pronouncement for his acolytes.

Case in point, Alex Epstein:

Alex has written a popular book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, and makes some very strong arguments against Mr. Gore’s position.

Meanwhile, Gore makes a boatload of cash by pretending to save the world.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Latitude

They are trying their best to discredit the backward deplorables……..someone needs to stop playing defence

Caligula Jones

C’mon folks, you can’t expect a Nobel Prize-winner debate a mere mortal…

Bill Powers

What do you suppose would happen when two previously selected honorees, ALGORE and BObama came together to greet the conference attendees? They would probably have to pass out those special glasses used to view a solar eclipse.

ResourceGuy

He should just go ahead and run for President on the Bernie ticket to fix the world…or maybe Denmark….or at least Santa Monica…..or maybe parts of Oakland.

Grumpy

Why debate?
It’s all settled. The debate is over we’re told by another tool.
Better to let skeptical, ethical folks continue to only think you’re the fool than to remove all doubt
The acolytes will not be pleased with the outcome anyway. .

Andy Pattullo

Debate is about science and evidence. Campaigning for a cause (i.e. the size of the Algoracle’s treasure chest) is about persuasion through deception. The impotent Goracle only has middling skills in the latter realm and none in the former. Why would he enter into a contest of wits so miserably armed.

R Shearer

Because of his strong Chakra?

Kenji

How in theeee hell can a man amass a FORTUNE $$$ and never offer any PROOF or double-blind study, or peer review (not compliant in-the-bag peers), or any demonstrable science for what he is selling? Or how can someone like Michael Mann, The Godfather of Global Warmism, REFUSE to provide his personal notes, and calculations to a court of law … to provide EVIDENCE in his lawsuit against “climate skeptic” Mark Steyn
Oh yeah … like THIS: https://nypost.com/2018/03/14/sec-accuses-theranos-ceo-elizabeth-holmes-of-massive-fraud/ Just promise “investors” (in “the future”) that you have built a “magic” product (that no one can see or test), and collect worldwide accolades along with $750 million dollars. And be a young hipster who just follows her “passion” and builds products to save the world !!! That just come crapping out of her sinister, er brilliantly creaaaaaative, brain.
Yes … modern snake oil carnival barkers are dressed in high tech algorithms, “science” and 1970’s technology. No worries though, because the public schools are churning out science illiterates who are taught to just “believe” in science that cannot be revealed or tested. We are not only giving birth to a sucker every minute … we are fabricating all the other children into suckers (on the government teat) at a clip of tens of thousands per minute.

rapscallion

Having a battle of wits with Al Gore is unarmed combat!

Bryan A

Sorry Alex
But getting AlGore to debate is like teaching a Sow to Sing

wws

It’s just like a massage – Al Gore will only debate if he’s promised a Happy Ending.

toorightmate

Stop insulting sows.

Sommer

Here’s a clip of Al Gore’s “candid conversation about climate change” with Kathleen Wynne in Ontario last week: https://globalnews.ca/video/4070754/al-gore-kathleen-wynne-and-alan-carter-have-a-candid-conversation-about-climate-change-at-torontos-ryerson-university

Sommer

Perhaps he was also called in after this opposition candidate stated that she would rip the wind turbines in rural Ontario out of the ground.

Snarling Dolphin

Marry me Tanya?

Tom Halla

Challenging ManBearPig is to be a heretic, and doubting either his assertions or his motives is not to be allowed.

scraft1

I don’t really think he’s afraid to debate. He’s taken on the meme that there’s a consensus on GW and that debating it would be dignifying a bunch of deniers. I run into people like that all the time, and there’s nothing to be gained by debating or arguing with them. The attitude is “you’re stupid if you don’t agree with the consensus.” I won’t even discuss it unless somebody else initiates it. This is another sign of the times – people are in their own world on controversial issues and a reasoned discussion is just about impossible.
I also think a well-conducted debate would do almost nothing to change anyone’s mind on the subject. I see no harm in a red-team exercise where each side states their position, but a debate would be a waste of time. AGW believers won’t agree to it anyway.

EternalOptimist

The idea of a debate is not so much to persuade your opponent, but to sway the middle ground

Steve R

Algore is a very poor debater. I don’t know if he is afraid, or whether its his handlers that have put their foot down on the isssue, but he tends to stay very stupid things when the conversation goes off script. Remember the temperature of the earth a few miles down being “millions of degrees”?

scraft1

And BTW, what has happened to the idea of a red team/blue team exercise? Scott Pruitt thought it was a good idea several months ago. And why can’t we stop propaganda exercises like the National Climate Assessment? I thought Trump was going to stop the gravy train for nonsense like this.

P Walker

John Kelly killed it. http.//www.breitbart.com/author/james-delingpole/ I can’t fit the entire url on my browser, but if you scroll down to 3/10 you’ll find it.

P Walker

The link didn’t work. Sorry, I haven’t posted a link here in quite a while- has wordpress changed something?

scraft1

If you set your browser to underline urls, they will be clickable on wordpress.

MarkW

I believe the “.” after the http is messing it up.

JohnWho

“I also think a well-conducted debate would do almost nothing to change anyone’s mind on the subject.”
Perhaps, but it would show the world how clueless and wrong he is. Well, assuming “the world” would listen to the debate objectively anyway.
It definitely would give us “skeptics” a good chuckle though, don’t you think?

“I also think a well-conducted debate would do almost nothing to change anyone’s mind on the subject.” Not so. Please view the IQ2US Debate, “Global Warming is Not a Crisis”
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-28qNd6ass
The IQ2US debate program involves querying the audience before and after the debate for their positions, to see in which direction the public collective viewpoints have shifted. If you fast forward to 1:38:38 of the video, you will see the results:
pre-debate, 29.88% were for the proposition, and 57.32% were against.
post-debate, 46.22% were for, and 42.22% were against.
IOW, the so-called “climate change deniers” won, and the shift was dramatic.
It’s easy to see why the CO2 catastrophist community, by and large, neither participates in, much less solicits, such debates.

hunter

Hawking was probably not actually communicating his own thoughts for several years prior to his announced death.
He was likely a gruesome meat puppet for his handlers use.

Patrick B

Any such debate would be boring and worthless. Gore does not know enough science and math to provide a real debate. If he ever participated, he would use political arguments and assumptions to “refute” any scientific points made by his opponent.

John Harmsworth

He should accept a debate with whomever seems to be the top AGW proponent. Then, every time his opponent makes a point he should preface his reply with, “Al Gore agrees with you and says this”, and then shred the statements of both Gore and the direct opponent.

Karlos51

the problem with debates is they often rely on inductive logic and not science to ‘score points’. “here, I have a really big pile of factoids versus your small pile, and you refuse to make definitive statemets so I win”
there need be an agreement on what school of logic is being applied before any debate begins and the adjudicator needs to enforce adherence to those rules.

joelobryan

Popes don’t debate.

ResourceGuy

+1

Joel Snider

Slight sideways topic, but did anyone see this from Mosher?
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/climate-change-alarmists-disregard-sanctity-of-human-life-population-expert
I’ll give props where props are due.

Not the “Wandering in the Weeds” Mr. Mosher.

Joel Snider

The same. I gave it a double-take myself.

“Wandering in the Weeds” Mr. Mosher is currently in China hawking Bitcoin mining equipment to the suckers.

Different guy.
Andrew

scraft1

Yep

Joel Snider

Okay, got me on that one – two Steven Mosher’s talking different sides of the same issue.
At least it makes sense now.

JohnWho

I’m going to assume (I know, shame on me) that that is the very same Stephen Mosher that often posts here and ask “Why then does he often post such inane drivel here?”

JohnWho

Ah, just saw Bad Andrew’s post above. My bad – this is the “sane” Stephen Mosher.
/grin

Peta of Newark

I posted this somewhere else round here but when the Gorical comes up, its worth repeating.
Any similarities in both the science and the personalities?
You only read need endure the first 15 minutes but may find the rest of it interesting
Especially if a wonderment about where ‘logic’ has gone is still burning in yer brane

Surely a scientific giant like Al Gore, who has probably taken over the mantle from Stephen Hawking, can debate anyone, anytime.

Sadly, late in life Stephen Hawking fell under the sway of climate change hucksters, a subject outside his expertise.

hunter

Hawking was probably not actually communicating his own thoughts for several years prior to his announced death.
He was likely a gruesome meat puppet for his handlers use.

RAH

hunter I’ll agree with that assessment. In my view no matter if you agree or disagree with his science and the nutty statements attributed to him in the last few years you have to admit the little guy had a lot of grit. Who here would drive on fighting to live for decades after it’s beyond your ability to even wipe your own ass?

As long as I can afford to hire someone to wipe it, I’m OK. Life is always preferable to the alternative, unless you just can’t deal with it.

Amber

Gore has zero scientific credentials so you have to give the guy credit for exposing the blind stupidity of most of the MSM . Ice free arctic … yep bought hook line and sinker at least for a while .
Gores appearances are staged to give a show not scientifically back up the assertions . Science doesn’t work on consensus it works using the scientific method so false and misleading climate models or prophesies of doom are nothing more than a marketing scam .
The foundation to the $trillion exaggerated global warming scam is bought and paid for pseudo science
and top flight circus pitch men looking to cash in on a tax payer shake down .

Bait him into suing you. If you could get him into court he might have to defend his claim.

Michael Jankowski

Shortly after his failed presidential run, Gore taught a seminar course at Columbia University. Students were not only forbidden from bringing recording devices but also paper and writing instruments.

Wading Across

algor – a sense of cold, a chill.

sy computing

Really Alex…”cowarditis”…???

hunter

Not to be disrespectful, but notice that Jesus, when given the chance to discuss his problems with Pilate chose obscurity and silence. If that is what the Savior chose, then how much more a savior wannabe?

john

Gore also failed divinity school…

WTF

Al is no scientist, but neither is Alex, he should get a relevant science degree and write a book entitled :
” The moral case for following the facts “

Yeah, and Al could write a book entitled:
“The moral case for “big” tobacco farmers”

MarkW

Facts are nothing without context.
Something your average warmist doesn’t seem to be able to handle.
It is a fact that CO2 has risen.
It is a fact that the earth has warmed over the last 150 years.
However going beyond those two facts to a conclusion is not in and of itself a “fact”.
Trying to claim that CO2 is responsible for most of that temperature rise is not a fact, it is an opinion.
An opinion that is bolstered only by various models. Models that have also failed every test thrown at them.
It is also a fact that the earth has been warmer than it is today at least 3 times in the last 3000 years. At times when CO2 levels were lower than they are today.
It is also a fact that for most of the last 10,000 years, the earth has been warmer than it is today, and CO2 levels were still lower than they are today.
So, do you want to talk facts, or do you just want to give us more expressions of your ignorance?

WTF

Mark,
The fact I like most is the denier’s collective failure to get their’ ‘evidence’ to stick, mainly due to the fact that you barely have a relevant science degree amongst yourselves.
And please don’t go all conspiracy theorist on me, your list of excuses grows.

‘evidence’ WTF? Like the real world doesn’t track the models?
Do the models justify fundamentally altering our society, economy and energy systems? Not, fool.

Craig

Now how exactly do you expect Gore to debate from under his desk?

Non Nomen

Lord Monckton challenged Al Baby Gore over and over again, but to no avail at all.
Or, in the words of Robert Burns:
“The coward slave – we pass him by,
We dare be poor for a’ that!”
“The honest man, tho’ e’er sae poor,
Is king o’ men for a’ that.”
Ali Al Gore, with his indisputable inexpertise, will never take his stand.

MorinMoss

@Dr Strangelove
“The entire North polarized (sic) cap will disappear in 5 years”
That’s not what Gore said. But having been a frequent reader and occasional commenter on this site for some years, it doesn’t surprise me that none bothered checking what his real statement was.

“….and this is the volumetric record of the ice. Some of the models suggest to Dr Maslowski there’s a 75% chance that the entire North polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice free within the next 5-7 years. Bob (referring to a previous speaker) used a figure of 2030 and the volumetric analysis leads Dr Maslowski to make that projection.
We will find out”

Ghandi

Old Al Gore is good at 2 things: making scads of money off of his global warming hucksterism and scaring the crap out of small children. He’s a sorry excuse for a human being and his legacy will be that of con-man extraordinaire.

Amber

One of the great things about President Trump is he has shed light on the MSM ethics ,
The media relies on a daily diet of fear and victims to sustain itself so flim flam preachers
are the fuel to produce a cheap product .
Given that most in the media are not exactly science majors the
fear mongering story line is just too easy to sell .
Yep it’s warming thankfully . Too bad for EXXON and others though, they will sell less .

MorinMoss

Isn’t this site supposedly all about real science? Why do you care about what beating Gore in a debate?
He’s not a scientist.
Challenge Richard Muller, Trenberth or Schmidt and try not to gish-gallop.
Remind me what happened with the Monckton-Hadfield matchup this site hosted some years back.
My aging memory vaguely recalls that Monckton suddenly found chasing Obama’s birth certificate to be of greater importance when it seemed Hadfield was getting the upper hand.